There is a history and context to this that we are not told, but while masks should not be required in spacious inside or outside places where there is good ventilation and congregants are spread out (or have already recovered from Covid), yet railing at some passive police "Nazi psychopaths. Unbelievable sick, evil people. Intimidating people in a church during the Passover! You Gestapo, Nazi, communist fascists! Don’t you dare come back here!” - who are likely just try do to their job - is not a commendable response is not truly akin to the Lord clearing the money changers from the temple, which was a case of turning the temple into a market (which likely involved price gouging) versus requiring submission to laws which presumably are a temporary extension of such public safety laws such as fire codes.
If this was a case of telling the pastor they could not hold services at all while the hyped pandemic continued, then he could have patiently let these lost souls utter their required warning and told these passive police that he understood that they they had to do their job, but that the church would be meeting, and practicing distancing and ventilation, and that they were welcome to come as private citizens to hear the message of Christ.
As for mask wearing, (as one who likely has been infected and recovered and has no primary comorbidities, thanks be to God) I personally loath them and consider the law requiring it in my state whenever outdoors in all public places to be absurd, and have had many confrontations with security and police in the past who opposed my holding forth the word of life,
and have even been detained and told I could never return (to a couple of malls) and finger printed and came close to being arrested by police when I did not leave. Yet I try to reasonably observe the public masking requirement (typically wearing a breathable mesh mask) when away from my property (though admittedly not always on the sidewalk in right front of it), and the priority of the church is not the exaltation of personal liberty versus preaching the word while avoiding giving the gospel message a bad name by unnecessary conflict. And thus the question must be asked where do we draw the line.
Faced with the requirement of paying a tax He did not owe, what do you think the fearless Lord did? Loudly invoke He rights and rail against those who sought to impose a requirement contrary to them? No. In order to avoid offense in a matter that placed a slight burden and did not hinder His work then He paid it. Of course the coin was provided thru supernatural means but it was still paid:
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee. (Matthew 17:24-27)
Likewise consider yourself as a slave and thus lacking in freedom of movement and yet you are commanded to serve your master well without complaining, though masters are commanded to "give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven." (Colossians 4:1)
Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things," (Titus 2:9-10; cf. Ephesians 6:5-8; Colossians 3:22-25) "Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed." (1 Timothy 6:1) Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. (1 Peter 2:18-20)
So do you start a protest that would actually make the situation worse for Christians in a slave states, or put up with a situation that the people of did not initiate or were commanded to maintain, but regulated to make it tolerable while the gospel which changes hearts from within is preached without directly becoming a civil rights movement?
Back to the situation at hand, the state is not to forbid Christians meeting organically together, but the church should also observe reasonable, temporary restrictions such as require distancing. And if mask wearing is to be required, then it should only be until a family unit is seated together (seeing as they live together then if they are gong to infect each other it would be a home they do so before a church.
More than that being required should be dealt with by appeal to the powers that be, an appeal to science in which most all transmission has been traced to household settings, even sometimes despite masking, yet it seems that that most transmission is by a small minority of the infected who have a high viral load (and which load) yet which masking can reduce. Lots of stats here on this whole issue, by the grace of God.
As for quarantines in the case of contagions, while they actually do have a Scriptural precedent, (Leviticus 13:46) yet in this case the worse place to be is in the same household with those who are infected, versus out in the open - yet which paradoxically was or is discouraged by required masking and or closing of parks. etc.